Tue Mar 12 10:03:07 1996

From majordom  Tue Mar 12 10:03:07 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA03194; Tue, 12 Mar 1996 10:03:07 +0500
Message-Id: <9603121500.AA12892@osf1.gmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Different dating systems
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 10:00:17 -0500 (EST)
From: "Stephen C Carlson" 
In-Reply-To: <960311222634_27597354@hp1.online.apple.com> from "MrNyse195@eworld.com" at Mar 11, 96 10:26:36 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 796       
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Status: O
X-Status: 

MrNyse195@eworld.com wrote:
>If papryologists come to a set date on a particular manuscript or set of mss.
>(say for example, p52 being around 110-138 A.D.), then how do liberal
>scholars come to their own conclusions (example- John being written later
>than 100 A.D. by someone other than John) and still consider themselves to be
>looking "honestly" at the evidence?

A late date (after 95) for the composition of John has the support of
Church Fathers like Irenaeus (c. 130 - 200).  I don't know if Irenaeus
can be considered a "liberal scholar."

Stephen Carlson
-- 
Stephen C. Carlson, George Mason University School of Law, Patent Track, 4LE
scarlso1@osf1.gmu.edu              : Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs
http://osf1.gmu.edu/~scarlso1/     : chant the words.  -- Shujing 2.35

Back